Drydens Fairfax / Arrow Global

[kentman2006]

Hi

Hope someone can help with my next step.

Got a CCJ claim from DF, acting for Arrow Global, for an old MBNA debt, apparently sold on.
I lodged a 28-day ack.of service, sent off a CPR request letter to DF. Within the 28-day period, I filed a full defence, quoting this request, and I saying I can't defend fully until I have sight of documents.
Received acknowledgement from Court saying "defended", then a letter from DF saying "thank you for request - this may take us some time as we will have to contact the original creditor" (abbreviated).

This was back in December, and have heard nothing further.

My question is what letter should I send now ? And is it to DF or the Court, or both, informing them that they have not supplied the documents and I am requesting a strike out of the claim ?

Was pleased at defending this claim, but just stalling on the last step to put it to bed. Any help or advice would be appreciated.

Thanks

[kentman2006]

Re: Drydens Fairfax / Arrow Global

Hello. Would anyone be able to help ?
I just read on the letter from HM Courts that "the claimant must respond to the court within 28 days of receiving your defence". Should I contact the court to see if Drydens have responded ?
Thanks

[Amethyst]

Re: Drydens Fairfax / Arrow Global

If it is past the 28 days then give the court a call and check if it has been stayed, and if it has you can write to the claimant telling them to send the docs within 7 days and remind them they will have to apply to the court to continue, else you will have to apply to strike out the claim as an abuse of process, if they can't produce the docs they should consider discontinuing the claim in order to save costs as you will be claiming the application fee of £155 back from them.

[kentman2006]

Re: Drydens Fairfax / Arrow Global

Hi Amethyst
Many thanks for your time in replying. Yes it is definitely more than 28 days now (what with Xmas and all I should have taken this up sooner).
What is the £155 application fee ? Is that something I have to pay for a strike out request ?

[kentman2006]

Re: Drydens Fairfax / Arrow Global

Hi Amethyst
I have just checked my MCOL page, and the claim is showing as "latest action - defence", filed 4/12/14
Shortly after was when I got the DF/AG letter saying "it will take some time to obtain the documents requested".
Should I act as you have advised in your first post ?
Thank you again

[kentman2006]

Re: Drydens Fairfax / Arrow Global

Just an update
Rang the Court service helpline for an update, and was told the claimant had not replied to the court within 28 days, so the case is currently "stayed".
Asked about getting a strike out request, and was told the fee is £50 if you don't request a hearing (or £155 if you do). She also advised I can write to the claimant if I want to, or can just let it lie.
Any action by the claimant would have to be informed to me by a district judge, so they cannot now issue a CCJ without me not knowing anything.

Of course, any further advice on whether to issue Drydens with an "unless you supply docs I will claim to strike out" order or not would be appreciated, thanks.
And could I add in a reclaim for my £50 fee plus costs for time, worry caused etc ?

And just looked at the Claim Form again and it is only "signed" by Drydens Ltd t/as Drydens Fairfax solicitors, with no person's actual name printed there.

[kentman2006]

Re: Drydens Fairfax / Arrow Global

Amethyst
Would you advise on sending a 7day "unless" doc ?

Thanks

[Amethyst]

Re: Drydens Fairfax / Arrow Global

Yes I would. Invite them to discontinue to save costs.

The signature bit could have been argued in your defence, but tbh it doesn't have a huge impact on the case just stalls things a bit so I wouldn't worry too much unless you do get to court.

[kentman2006]

Re: Drydens Fairfax / Arrow Global

Thanks Amethyst, Just wanted to tie that last bit up. Will write to them this week and post developments.

[kentman2006]

Re: Drydens Fairfax / Arrow Global

Hi Amethyst and others
Well I sent off the "considering a strike out application" letter last week, and Drydens now decide to speed things up by emailing their reply.

Cut and pasted below the relevant part. The default notice was indeed attached (dated 2011), but nothing more than that.

Would appreciate any more advice, especially regarding their opposition to my intended strike out.......thanks
We refer to your letter dated 12 February 2015, the contents of which have been duly noted.

Please be advised that the reason this Claim is now stayed is because we are in the process of obtaining supporting documentation in respect of the Claim to serve upon you as requested. Please note, as this is an assigned debt, there will be some delay in obtaining the account documentation, as our client is reliant upon a third party (the original creditor, MBNA) to obtain certain documents. (My note here - it is stayed because of no reply to my defence after 28 days, and now 60+ days).

Because our file is on hold and the claim is stayed, you are not subject to any prejudice whilst we await the original creditor’s response to our requests, and we ensure the matter remain stayed until the documentation is received and served upon you. We will also ensure that sufficient time is provided to you to review the documentation and to consider your position in respect of these proceedings.

Please find attached the default notice which we have yesterday received from our Client. The rest of the documentation will follow upon receipt.

We appreciate your patience and assure we are making our best efforts to meet your request. However, we must advise you that we believe an application to strike out the claim is wholly unnecessary, nor would it be reasonable in the circumstances. We have kept you updated of our position and are making our best efforts to comply with your request.

We trust this is clear and we will soon be in touch with the rest of the documentation as requested. Our client has now made an escalated request to MBNA for the further documentation requested.

Please be advised that, should you continue with an application to strike out the claim, we would defend our client’s position on the basis that your request is completely unreasonable in the circumstances, as you are in no prejudice to hold for the documents. Please note that we would also seek our costs in opposing such an application on the grounds of its unreasonableness.

We thank you for your patience.

[kentman2006]

Re: Drydens Fairfax / Arrow Global

Hello
Would anyone be able to offer some guidance as to my reply to them please ?

Thanks

[PAWS]

Re: Drydens Fairfax / Arrow Global

Hello Kentman,
Just giving this a wee bump for you as I would be interested to see how this develops.:bump2:

[Amethyst]

Re: Drydens Fairfax / Arrow Global

Hiya, well in some respects they are correct but they have bought a claim against you without having had sight of documents they intend to rely on, which I would say is an abuse of process.

Not sure where this debt was in relation to statute barring - that is also an argument that the delay does prejudice you, as they may have bought the case simply to halt the limitations expiry knowing they can then spend forever trying to find some evidence to stick it on you.

They will already need to apply to the court to lift the stay so you could just wait and see if they did that and argue against the point at that stage.

[kentman2006]

Re: Drydens Fairfax / Arrow Global

Hi Amethyst

Thanks for your time and reply.
(It's not SB, but a/c opened in 2006. Had three redundancies quickly in 2008/9/10 and a period of unemployment and lost track of most debts then.
MBNA apparently offloaded it to Arrow Global.)

Their wording about "you are in no prejudice to hold for the documents" I wasn't sure what they meant ?

Do you think I should reply to their email letter so they know I won't be intimidated by their legalese threat to recover costs ? And how long do you think is reasonable to allow them to keep in stayed before I lodge a strike out.
And is that risky if they defend that and counterclaim their costs ? The 28-day to respond rule is surely there for a reason ?

And should they manage to come up with the original docs from 2006, and I end up with nowhere to go, can I ask them for a Tomlin Order instead of a CCJ, and use their protracted delays and my goodwill (i.e. not striking out), as a bargaining chip?

Thanks again

[kentman2006]

Re: Drydens Fairfax / Arrow Global

Hi Amethyst and others

Would you be able to help on the tone and content of my reply please ?

Thanks